On Feb 1, 2008 7:38 AM, Felipe Martinez Hermo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got vfs_cache_pressure = 100 on both servers and ext3 filesystems > on both. > These are the files on /proc/sys/vm: > > slow server: > ======== > file > value > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 block_dump > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 dirty_background_ratio > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 dirty_expire_centisecs > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 dirty_ratio > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 dirty_writeback_centisecs > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 drop_caches > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 laptop_mode > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 legacy_va_layout > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 lowmem_reserve_ratio > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 max_map_count > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 min_free_kbytes > -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 nr_pdflush_threads > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 overcommit_memory > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 overcommit_ratio > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 page-cluster > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 panic_on_oom > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 percpu_pagelist_fraction > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 swappiness > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 swap_token_timeout > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 vdso_enabled > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:31 vfs_cache_pressure 0 > 10 > 3000 > 40 > 500 > 0 > 0 > 0 > 256 256 32 > 65536 > 3831 > 2 > 0 > 50 > 3 > 0 > 0 > 60 > 300 > 1 > 100 > > > > Fast server: > ======== > file > value > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 block_dump > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 dirty_background_ratio > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 dirty_expire_centisecs > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 dirty_ratio > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 dirty_writeback_centisecs > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 laptop_mode > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 lower_zone_protection > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 max_map_count > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 min_free_kbytes > -r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 nr_pdflush_threads > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 overcommit_memory > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 overcommit_ratio > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 page-cluster > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 swappiness > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2008-02-01 13:32 vfs_cache_pressure 0 > 10 > 3000 > 40 > 500 > 0 > 0 > 65536 > 957 > 2 > 0 > 50 > 3 > 60 > 100 > > > > > > Scott Lovenberg escribió: > > Felipe Martinez Hermo wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Hi, everybody! > >> > >> I have been using samab on Debian for years and I have recently > >> migrated my file server from version 3.0.14a-3sarge2 to 3.0.24-6etch4. > >> One or our applications stores its data in a shared folder. This data > >> is distributed in over 29000 files of about 1k-40k and is so much > >> slower when it runs on the new server. > >> > >> I have thoroughly revised both smb.conf files, but can't see > >> significant differences. I have read them so much that probably I'm > >> already obfuscated. > >> > >> I have tuned socket options, but can't see any improvement. > >> Any ideas? > >> > >> Thanks in advance > >> > > how are your settings in /proc/sys/vm/*? If you've got the RAM, turn > > down the vfs_cache_pressure - you should get more hits. Also, what > > file system are you using? > > -- > ============================== > Felipe Martínez Hermo > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ============================== > Servicios Informáticos > UGT Galicia > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ============================== > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba > OK, so we're apples to apples, so to speak; the servers are tuned the same. I'll assume your disks are tuned from hdparm and up to snuff, otherwise you wouldn't be tuning sockets ;). Did your old server have samba settings for oplocks set? -- Peace and Blessings, -Scott. "Of course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong" -Dennis Miller -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
